Two-thirds of Americans support Medicare-for-all (#3 of 6) - Kip Sullivan

[slipslidingaway]

http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/12/09/two-thirds-support-3/

"The more they know about single-payer, the more they like it

In this paper (Part 3 in a six-part series) I will present data from polls that ask about single-payer, and then inquire why some polls show landslide majorities for single-payer and some do not. We will find a clear pattern: Polls that convey more information tend to report higher levels of support than polls that convey little information, and polls that convey accurate information tend to report more support than polls that convey inaccurate information....

....Summary

We have now reviewed three categories of polls that correspond roughly to support levels of 60 to 70 percent, 50 to 60 percent, and below 50 percent. Polls that produce greater-than-60-percent levels of support for single payer not only use the phrase “single-payer” but compare the concept to an existing single-payer program, typically Medicare. Polls showing 50 to 60 percent support inquire about “single payer” without comparing the concept to Medicare or to the single-payer systems of other countries or they pose the question about single-payer in a line-up context. Polls that seem to ask about single-payer and which show less than 50 percent support use phrasing that is so vague respondents cannot know whether the program being asked about is a single-payer and, if so, how it would work.

We saw in Part 2 of this series that two citizen juries conducted in the 1990s produced landslide votes for single-payer – votes equal to roughly 60 to 80 percent of all the participating “jurors.” These lengthy “jury” experiments are far more reliable than any poll could possibly be. And yet some polls confirm the “jury” experiments and some don’t. If we ask why, the answer is the polls that show support in at least the 60-to-70-percent range use the phrase “single payer” and give respondents concrete examples of single-payer programs.

If we couple the “jury” experiments with the polling data reviewed in this part, we see a pattern: The more people know about single-payer, the more likely they are to support it. We see this pattern when we compare the “jury” results with poll results, and we see it when we compare polls that show high levels of support for single-payer with those that don’t.

Stay tuned for Part 4: “Jacob Hacker’s ambiguous polls”


Part 1 posted here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7172977&mesg_id=7172977

Direct links

http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/12/06/two-thirds-support-1/
http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/12/07/two-thirds-support-2/


My post on the Kaiser poll ...

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/80

The Power of the Word Medicare -
Fri Aug 21st 2009, 07:23 PM

When the word Medicare is used in the various polls, the number of people who favor the plan automatically jumps, it makes no difference if the question relates to the public option or a national insurance system such as single-payer...the word "Medicare" has a favorable connotation.

The Kaiser Health Tracking poll is one of the few recent polls that asks about a single-payer plan or government run insurance plan for all, many of the polls leave SP out altogether and that includes the widely cited poll from June saying that 72% of people want a public option.

What Kaiser did, at times, was half sample certain questions.

For instance if they were sampling 1200 people, they would ask about a public plan "like Medicare" to only half of the people. The other half they would leave out the word "Medicare" and the support for a public plan, or single-payer, would drop.

Back in July their poll showed a jump in support for SP and I posted about it below, when there was a half sample I used the highest number, regardless of whether or not it was about a public option or SP.....

[RufusTFirefly]

1. "The more they know about single-payer, the more they like it"

But of course! The problem is that Congress and the pharmaceutical industry are keeping the truth from American voters, giving them Sarah Palin and her "death panels" instead.

Single-payer is really a bipartisan issue.

You'd never know it because it never gets covered. But it is!

[slipslidingaway]

3. Exactly, it does not get covered! Two links below are from 1993 ...

and yes there is always today's diversion.

:(

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6499259&mesg_id=6499259

It's Time for a Real Debate on National Health Insurance

May 12,1993

"...Instead, they gathered in front of the New York Times building, and their demand was simple: "Stop rationing health care news!" The protesters are angry over the fact that the newspaper's reporting routinely downplays a popular proposal-endorsed by 12 of New York City's 14 members of Congress-to overhaul the American health system: a singlepayer system of publicly-financed health care.

Poll after poll has shown that most Americans favor tax-financed national health insurance. But at the New York Times and other national media, proponents are kept at the periphery of the health care debate. They include 58 members of Congress who, on March 3 <1993>, introduced a bill-"The American Health Security Act"-to establish a Canadian-style, single-payer system.


Extra! July/August 1993

Healthcare Reform: Not Journalistically Viable?

"...The justification media managers give for the imbalance of attention is that while managed competition is supported by the Clinton administration, a single-payer system is not "politically viable." What this means is that news judgements are based on elite preferences, not on popular opinion: The New York Times' own polling since 1990 has consistently found majorities--ranging from 54 percent to 66 percent--in favor of tax-financed national health insurance..."

[slipslidingaway]

2. "Citizens' Health Care Working Group" Ignores Citizens

Various links, our politicians are not listening :(
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/29

Is there more support for a single payer system than we are being told?


"The group created by Congress to listen to Americans’ ideas for improving the health system has ignored their overwhelming advice to create a national health insurance program. Although a national health program was by far the most favored option at 86 percent (25 of 29) of the meetings of the Citizens’ Health Care Working Group (CHCWG), the group’s recommendations avoid the clear public preference for government-guaranteed health coverage.

When given a choice of ten reform options at public hearings held by the CHCWG, participants clearly favored a national health program by a margin of at least 3 to 1. At meetings where participants were asked to rank the 10 options, national health insurance was ranked first 16 of 19 times...

The 15-member CHCWG was created as a part of the 2003 Medicare drug bill to hold public hearings on health care and make recommendations to the President and Congress on “ways to improve and strengthen the health care system based on the information and preferences expressed at the community meetings.”


18 page pdf
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/chc/recommendations/circ_exsumm.pdf

"...Over nearly eighteen months, the Working Group engaged thousands of Americans, including:

• About 6,650 people attending 84 community meetings across the nation as well as
meetings organized by individual Working Group Members and other organizations
by the end of May, 2006, and input from over 700 people attending 14 meetings after
the Interim Recommendations were published on June 2nd (Tabs 1 and 2).

• Over 14,000 responses to the Working Group Internet poll; and another 6,000 sets of
responses to open-ended questions about health care in America

• Over 500 descriptions of experiences with the health care system submitted via the
Internet or on paper, and about 400 email letters, handwritten notes, letters, essays,
and copies of reports that people sent to the Working Group.

• About 7,300 individual email and written comments on the Working Group’s Interim
Recommendations ..."

[RufusTFirefly]

4. I'm wary of over-simplification, but the problem can be summed up in one word:

Corporations

I'm not against corporations per se, but the balance of power between corporations and government is totally out of whack to the point where the two are almost unrecognizable. (Although it is incorrectly attributed to Mussolini, this present situation comes agonizingly close to a time-honored definition of fascism: "fascism is corporatism.") Congress is no longer serving the people. Congress is serving its constituents and benefactors, which happen to be one and the same: corporations. The press (media), which are so important to the health of a democracy that the Founding Fathers actually took the extraordinary step of mentioning them in the First Amendment, have traditionally provided an additional check on the abuses of both business and government. But corporations now almost completely control the media, thus choking off a vital lifeline to an informed democracy. Those same corporations treat members of Congress as their own personal marionettes. On the few occasions that Congress actually seems to go toe to toe with business, it's like Honda competing against Acura (which is owned by Honda). In short, Kabuki theater. Is it any wonder that we've reached this ominous point?

[slipslidingaway]

6. There is no reason to make things complex when you nailed one the ..

root causes.

;-)

Unfortunately, IMO, the only way to turn this around is when more people are struggling and they really start paying attention.

[eridani]

5. K&R

[slipslidingaway]

7. Thanks n/t

[amborin]

11. ditto

[slipslidingaway]

8. kick - It does not matter what the people want. n/t

[Cleita]

9. Liking isn't enough.

Now it's a matter of beating down the profit makers. They think they own us but they don't.

[slipslidingaway]

12. Congratulations on your bumper sticker! I wish these profit makers...

had a product we could boycott.

[Cleita]

14. Thank you for the congratulations but DU made it happen.

:-)

[dysfunctional press]

10. medicare isn't single-payer- why would 'medicare-for-all' be?

it's 80% of single payer.

and that other 20% can be a bitch if nobody will sell you supplemental coverage, and they don't have to.

[slipslidingaway]

13. You can always improve and extend :) n/t

[dysfunctional press]

15. not when the corporacrats control every branch of government...

and both political parties.

[slipslidingaway]

16. No disagreement from me on that point :( nt